ToffeeWeb - Season 2007-08

The Mail Bag

KEIOC plan

....from the people who brought you "Look out, Kirkby — we're hooligans", The Keep Everton In Our City campaign have released plans for a redeveloped Goodison and I have to say that not for the first time, I'm completely underwhelmed by their arguments.

To quote directly from the KEOIC website:
" We are pleased to be able to show the long awaited plan for a redeveloped Goodison Park. Having worked closely with KEIOC Tom Hughes' plans will once and for all put to rest the myth that there is no plan B.

" Here it is in its entirety.

" There is no embellishment, no comic book floodlights and no emotive imagery. We think Evertonians know what a stadium looks like and here we offer a blank canvas, a starting point. We could also have plucked figures from thin air and we could tell you the stadium will cost one million, five million or two hundred and fifty million pounds to redevelop."

There, resplendant in its glory is KEIOC's plan B. It consists of an airfix-style model stadium.

Erm...

That's it.

In fact, even that's being generous. KEOIC mention that this is "a blank canvas, a starting point" should be read as " nothing like the final stadium "

Naturally, it follows that they can't even guess as to how much such a stadium would cost (or how long it would take, who would invest, how would we survive while it's built, how much debt we would be left with and countless other questsions).

Not much of a realistic alternative then, is it? A much more realistic alternative is that we stay at Goodison Park and just give it a new lick of paint every few years until it fails its safety certificate which is what I think will happen if KEOIC get their way.

My ideal solution would be to built the Kirkby stadium to be built on our existing footprint, for it to be named New Goodison and to have a sugar daddy investing hundreds of millions of pounds, expecting nothing but a premium seat every match and the best for the club. I believe that all Everton fans would hope for something similar.

However, I understand that this simply isn't going to happen. Therefore, I'm firmly in the Yes to Kirkby camp.

I'm actually starting to feel sorry for those saying no with these KEIOC idiots 'representing' you. They're unprofessional, overexcited and to be frank, fairly embarrassing to me as an Everton fan.
Chris Gallagher, Nottingham Posted 03/08/2007 at 13:04:50

back Return to the Mail Bag

Comments

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Lyndon

Chris, before you go off on labeling people as "idiots" and "embarrassing", it's worth pointing out that this wasn't a full, commissioned study with lovely nighttime images for which thousands of pounds were paid. This was one guy, with assistance on the CAD rendering side, devoting more hours than I would like to guess at on putting forth a plan for a redeveloped Goodison Park.

You may have an issue with some KEIOC's tactics — no one's denying they haven't made mistakes along the way — but the effort that ordinary Evertonianss have made in attempting to put forth alternative plans where the club weren't providing any is something to be applauded and not ridiculed, no matter on which side of the debate you stand.

Allan
1 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:09:31

Lyndon, to say the club has done nothing is nothing short of embarrasing in itself!

If they’ve done nothing, why are we debating the Kirkby proposal?

I dont follow your argument at all Im afraid.

Alex May
2 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:10:44

Very good Chris. Now read the 29 page PDF file, the link to which can be found on this site.

Where is the club’s ’airfix model’ then. Their supporting ’evidence’ runs to 5 pages of quotes and no detail.

A poster on another site has shown how easy it is to create the Kirkby pictures. They also managed to turn the seats blue and superimpose a crowd on to them.

Ask not what a group of fans have managed to show, ask what those whose job it is to run our club have provided. The answer is a big heap of spin, downright lies and changing numbers.

Dave Thompson
3 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:15:35

Kenwright said that re-developing Goodison on the same footprint was not possible. Yet here it is, in detail.

Not being qualified in stadium design or construction, I can’t say whether those plans stack up or not, but the reality is that I can’t say that about Kirkby either.

The club will have to pay for all or part of any over run costs at Kirkby. On that basis alone, you have no idea how much it will cost, unless you are crazy enough to believe that it will be brought in on budget. And what is that budget - even Wyness has admitted he doesn’t know!

The KEIOC Goodison plan could be carried out over a long period of time, in the same way that other clubs such Man U and Newcastle have done it. Goodison isn’t falling down, so there is no rush, and at present, we’re still desperately trying to sell season tickets for this season, so there’s no capacity problems either.

Gavin Ramejkis
4 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:19:46

I’d also point point out that the club’s drip fed pictures are merely teasers aimed at the lowest common denominator whereas the KEIOC pdf is from an engineering perspective which in effect bar the crucial funding element provided far more detail than ANYTHING the club has provided despite months of work. They could have at least offered links to more technical details for any supporters interested in seeing them if they do have them.

Chris Gallagher
5 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:11:37

Lyndon, you do make a fair point that it wasn’t a full, commissioned study. However, I would counter that in this case, it is in no-way a realistic ’plan B’.

To me, this kind of smacks of dirty American politics. vote no for these other guys, they’re terrible! Here are our plans to but they’re very much ideas at the moment. Forget about that for the moment though - remember this, they’re terrible these other guys

(Does that actually make sense to anyone or was I have a weird ’lemon jelly’ moment???)

The ’idiots’ comment was based on the hooligan episode and I understand that the leadership has changed since then so perhaps that was a little strong on the current incumbants. I do stick by the overexcited, unprofessional and embarrassing comments though.

As I say, there is a plan B. Stay at Goodison.

However, the club have come up with a viable, costed, realistic plan and partnered with just about the biggest name in British industry today. Relative to this, plan B has little going for it and is therefore not a realistic option.

I applaud anyone trying to make a difference but even if KEIOC were really really good at spin (which they aren’t), you have to have something of substance to base that on (which they don’t).

Chris Gallagher
6 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:32:41

Fair point, didn’t see the 29 page doc. I will withdraw my last comment until I’ve read through it.

Chris Gallagher
7 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:32:41

Fair point, didn’t see the 29 page doc. I will withdraw my last comment until I’ve read through it.

Neil Pearse
8 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:28:03

David: "The club will have to pay for part or all of any overrun costs at Kirkby".

Okay, now let’s go slowly for those who still don’t get it: THE CLUB WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR PART (PROBABLY ALL) OF ANY OVERRUN COSTS FOR ANY NEW STADIUM THAT IS BUILT, AND FOR ANY REDEVELOPMENT OF GOODISON. Got it yet?

The fact that Tescos and Knowsley council will share in the overrun costs makes this a BETTER financial deal that all known other alternatives.

Whichever way you look at it, (a) there are always financial risks associated with large construction projects; (b) it is better to have risk-sharing partners (as in Kirkby) than not (as in all other other known proposals); and (c) of all proposals, Kirkby is by far the most fully and detailed costed proposal on the table.

It’s fine to say that you don’t want to move from Goodison or Liverpool for EMOTIONAL reasons (I actually share many of them); but to prefer any other known option than Kirkby for FINANICAL reasons simply means you are not able to read, or count to ten.

Neil Pearse
9 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:40:58

Gavin, your argument says it all. The KEIOC argument is better "bar the crucial funding element".

It’s brilliant! We just have no idea how how we are going to pay for it!

Thanks lads. You’ve got a brilliant business idea, you just don’t have any money, and you don’t know anybody who has any money.

I think I might stick with Terry Leahy.

John Charles
10 Posted 03/08/2007 at 16:51:40

Key Problems with KEIOC ’Plan B’

1) No cost estimate

2) Does not take into account accelerated/appreciating construction cost over the 4-5 year period of reconstruction

3) No costing or commerical partner information. ’Build a hotel’ is not a business plan.

I ackonowledge that they have a small time scale to work in, but to me this is pie in the sky -as much as Id love to see it.

It’s not closeto being realistic for me. You can do anything ’impossible’ if you throw enough money at it..but without being in the know this kind of project looks astronomical.

"Nil Satis Nisi Optimum" and all that some will say. But really... this changes nothing for my vote. How does this get build, when does it get build, whats the chances of it happened? Personally I amnot throwing a great Kirkby stadium and deal into the bin for ever on the basis of such a speculative attempt.

I admire the principals, time and effort and I have no doubt it could be built - but only if we throw hundreads of millions at it which we simply do not have. When will people get there heads around the fact if you do not have the money or cannto obtain the money you cannot just build it. This isnt a ’plan b’, its not even remotely close to being a plan B without an costing and funding package to go with it.

Gavin Ramejkis
11 Posted 03/08/2007 at 17:41:58

Neil can you clarify your contradiction from your first comment:

"Okay, now let?s go slowly for those who still don?t get it: THE CLUB WILL HAVE TO PAY FOR PART (PROBABLY ALL) OF ANY OVERRUN COSTS FOR ANY NEW STADIUM THAT IS BUILT"

then you type:

"The fact that Tescos and Knowsley council will share in the overrun costs makes this a BETTER financial deal that all known other alternatives."

What’s it to be Neil the club fund the overrun as you claim or Tesco and Knowsley share the overrun as you also claim?

It would be a fair assumption as a private enterprise that the overruns would be in fitting the stadia out and build amendments of which both would be the liability as per KW of Everton Football Club.

Bob Turner
12 Posted 03/08/2007 at 19:39:38

Gsvin, you’re missing the rather obvious point. An additional £5m here or there in overruns (assuming they are solely Everton’s responsibility, anyway!) is small potatoes compared to the whopping cost saving we make from no land acquisition costs and no stadium building costs.

As Neil says, financially, it’s a no-brainer. Kirkby wins, end of.

Chris Gallagher
13 Posted 03/08/2007 at 21:15:16

Right, I’ve now read the 29 page PDF and can say that I am impressed with the effort which has gone into it. This is precisely the kind of stuff that KEIOC should have been doing a long time ago - then they might have had some idea about costs, funding, etc.

My thoughts now are perfectly encapsulated by John Charles, above. Well said, sir.